Technical ***February 2024 Banger Meet Thread - Happy Groundhog's Day***

I believe the '27 head is only a one-port exhaust, so pretty marginal. From what I understand, the only years that would really be an "upgrade" on a Ford is the '28 Chevy and the '23 Olds head. The Olds is a four-port and is what Bob Rufi ran on his lakes car back in the day. It's the best setup if you can find one.

 

What are these wheels/wheel covers called? I've seen them before and they really make the look of the car.

 

They are "Disteel" wheels, I think they really help the visual balance of the car. The body is so large, the wheels help bring it together.

 

The '28 has larger valves, twin ports, better rocker ratio and better cooling.

 

Here is what I did(with the help of some knowledgeable friends

 

That is really nice and clean and a perfect solution around the headers.
Warren

 

Do most of you guys with the Holleys not run the choke at all?

 

No need for a choke if the carb has an accelerator pump- a few pumps/squirts and off you go. 97s, 84s, Holleys etc

Ok- clarify to mean non-winfield accelerator pumps. AND purely throttle linkage operated plunger type acelerator pumps AND specifically non-vacuum operated.

 

Just adding a clarification for us fellers with cool carbs… Winfield SR accelerator pumps are vacuum operated, so best to keep the choke

 

It gets cold here and I drive when it is in the teens and twenties...so I need a choke until the engine warms up some or there are lean pops out the carb

 

Has anyone here had any durability problems with a Eubanks crankshaft ?

 

Hi Mike- not sure that Dan made that many of them to get any real history- I might be incorrect though. This is a B crank or?

 

Mike, Dan

yes Dan only made about 15-20 cranks
Yes they have not held up that well
As far as I can tell they were cast out of a meenanite gray iron and just not hard enough
I have looked at two that came out of OHV motors that bent
But I also have one running in a FH motor that seems ok
And yes it was a C crank design

J

 

Thank you Dan and John. It's a T crank made to Model A specs, being a casting I always felt uneasy about it. I have a Scat crank and a reworked Model A crank I can use. This will be used on a Pease Brothers overhead (much like a Rajo BBR head).

 

Mike
I have to agree that the Ford metallurgy was superb for the day
I will not work on anything other than a Ford mfg crank when drilling or welding B/C

When my Eubanks give up the ghost it will be replaced by Ford steel

Dan did make some really good parts and he will be missed

J

 

Yup, I'd go with the Scat if you have it or the A crank if you know who modified it, assuming its been shortened. As you are probably aware, there are some shortening jobs that are less than ideal.

 

Got an engine stand up and functioning. Mounted the engine and flipped it over. Everything looks very clean. The engine had no compression, wondering if the rings stuck? Any tricks at unsticking rings?

 

I had a friend with a Holley 4 bbl that the air horn had been machined off. He lived in WI and for cold mornings he ran a small plastic oil gauge tube through the firewall and into the air cleaner. A shot of ether always got it going. The spray tube on the ether can fit nicely into the oil gauge tube.

 

I would question the valves before the rings if it had NO compression. Either way, the head has to come off to do anything useful. Nice collection of pieces though..........

 

Broke out the telescoping gauges and checked the bores, measuring perpendicular to the wrist pin (is that correct?) measured at the upper end of the bore where there was a visual wear line, guessing the upper limit of the rings and then off the top of the piston when it was at the bottom of the stroke.

pistons are stamped 0.040 over vs. 3.750 stock

#1 3.7910 / 3.7915
#2 3.7905 / 3.7900
#3 3.7910 / 3.7920
#4 3.7910 / 3.7905

thoughts?...

 

Hmmm
#1-3 looks pretty good
2-4 not so much

telescoping or snap gauges require technique to get good results
Having .005 taper is not uncommon but the other two look too good

I typically bore and hone the bores to be .001 smaller at the top
If you can get your hands on a sunnen mandrel and stones you can make a couple passes and see the worn low spots
Then make a decision
J

 

Yup, 40 over- bores probably ok. Looks to be a set of Jahns sand cast pistons. Those were all that was available back in the 60's before Egge started making T pistons. Ring pack should be .125, .125 and .187 oil. Any scoring on the skirts or ring lands?

Bore variation could be just a poor hone job or it may have been due to the pistons being different sizes, but those differences are not enough to rebore to a different size. Measure the pistons and lets see how much clearance you have- thats what really matters anyway.

 

I've not seen extensions on the oil scoops of the rod caps on the Model B engines i have taken apart. Any explanation for these?

 

Dips for the rods, instead of the little pressed steel ones, who ever built this engine put a lot of thought into it.

 

They are Jahns, this engine really has a 60's build feel. Bores feel smooth with no ridges or wear marks. The variance may also be attributed to the person who did the measuring...

I'll pop the rods and pistons out next weekend.

 

look like you corrected the data, all the better
check clearances and run it!!

 

As you noted...technique. After about the 2nd complete circuit, started getting the hang of and did it 2 more times

I'd bet that the variances are due to gauge operator error, more than anything.

 

Gday all, I'm putting a stock Generator back together, it's been a while since I pulled it apart & I must have been tired as I didn't make any notes. I've been looking for info on putting it back together (have replaced bearings & coils to 12v.) But haven't found anything helpful. Can someone point me in the right direction?

 

Happy February! Groundhog installed my headlights finally...